From: David Leimbach <leimy2k@gmail.com>
To: Fans of the OS Plan 9 from Bell Labs <9fans@9fans.net>
Subject: Re: [9fans] threads vs forks
Date: Tue, 3 Mar 2009 21:19:16 -0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <3e1162e60903032119i1885178ema25c7942e86a03b9@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <3aaafc130903031754v25f7db38y65f9863ebab6ff32@mail.gmail.com>
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1285 bytes --]
On Tue, Mar 3, 2009 at 5:54 PM, J.R. Mauro <jrm8005@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 3, 2009 at 7:54 PM, erik quanstrom <quanstro@quanstro.net>
> wrote:
> >> I should have qualified. I mean *massive* parallelization when applied
> >> to "average" use cases. I don't think it's totally unusable (I
> >> complain about synchronous I/O on my phone every day), but it's being
> >> pushed as a panacea, and that is what I think is wrong. Don Knuth
> >> holds this opinion, but I think he's mostly alone on that,
> >> unfortunately.
> >
> > it's interesting that parallel wasn't cool when chips were getting
> > noticably faster rapidly. perhaps the focus on parallelization
> > is a sign there aren't any other ideas.
>
> Indeed, I think it is. The big manufacturers seem to have hit a wall
> with clock speed, done a full reverse, and are now just trying to pack
> more transistors and cores on the chip. Not that this is evil, but I
> think this is just as bad as the obsession with upping the clock
> speeds in that they're too focused on one path instead of
> incorporating other cool ideas (i.e., things Transmeta was working on
> with virtualization and hosting foreign ISAs)
Can we bring back the Burroughs? :-)
>
>
> >
> > - erik
> >
> >
>
>
[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 1901 bytes --]
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2009-03-04 5:19 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 71+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2009-03-03 11:52 hugo rivera
2009-03-03 15:19 ` David Leimbach
2009-03-03 15:32 ` Uriel
2009-03-03 16:15 ` hugo rivera
2009-03-03 15:33 ` hugo rivera
2009-03-03 18:11 ` Roman V. Shaposhnik
2009-03-03 18:38 ` Bakul Shah
2009-03-06 18:47 ` Roman V Shaposhnik
2009-03-06 20:38 ` David Leimbach
2009-03-07 8:00 ` Bakul Shah
2009-03-07 0:21 ` Bakul Shah
2009-03-07 2:20 ` Brian L. Stuart
2009-03-03 23:08 ` J.R. Mauro
2009-03-03 23:15 ` Uriel
2009-03-03 23:23 ` J.R. Mauro
2009-03-03 23:54 ` Devon H. O'Dell
2009-03-04 0:33 ` J.R. Mauro
2009-03-04 0:54 ` erik quanstrom
2009-03-04 1:54 ` J.R. Mauro
2009-03-04 3:18 ` James Tomaschke
2009-03-04 3:30 ` erik quanstrom
2009-03-04 4:44 ` James Tomaschke
2009-03-04 5:05 ` J.R. Mauro
2009-03-04 5:50 ` erik quanstrom
2009-03-04 6:08 ` andrey mirtchovski
2009-03-04 16:52 ` J.R. Mauro
2009-03-04 17:14 ` ron minnich
2009-03-04 17:27 ` William Josephson
2009-03-04 18:15 ` erik quanstrom
2009-03-05 3:32 ` J.R. Mauro
2009-03-05 3:39 ` erik quanstrom
2009-03-05 3:55 ` William K. Josephson
2009-03-05 4:00 ` erik quanstrom
2009-03-05 4:16 ` William K. Josephson
2009-03-07 3:01 ` William Josephson
2009-03-07 3:31 ` erik quanstrom
2009-03-07 6:00 ` William Josephson
2009-03-07 13:58 ` erik quanstrom
2009-03-07 14:37 ` William Josephson
2009-03-07 15:05 ` erik quanstrom
2009-03-07 15:28 ` William K. Josephson
2009-03-07 5:00 ` lucio
2009-03-07 5:08 ` William Josephson
2009-03-07 5:19 ` erik quanstrom
2009-03-07 5:45 ` [9fans] Flash William K. Josephson
2009-03-07 14:42 ` erik quanstrom
2009-03-07 14:56 ` William Josephson
2009-03-07 15:39 ` Russ Cox
2009-03-07 16:34 ` erik quanstrom
2009-03-07 5:24 ` [9fans] threads vs forks lucio
2009-03-04 5:19 ` David Leimbach [this message]
2009-03-04 2:47 ` John Barham
2009-03-04 5:24 ` blstuart
2009-03-04 5:37 ` erik quanstrom
2009-03-04 16:29 ` Roman V Shaposhnik
2009-03-04 16:56 ` john
2009-03-06 9:39 ` maht
2009-03-04 5:07 ` David Leimbach
2009-03-04 5:35 ` John Barham
2009-03-03 16:00 ` ron minnich
2009-03-03 16:28 ` hugo rivera
2009-03-03 17:31 ` ron minnich
2009-03-03 16:47 ` John Barham
2009-03-04 9:37 ` Vincent Schut
2009-03-04 9:58 ` hugo rivera
2009-03-04 10:30 ` Vincent Schut
2009-03-04 10:45 ` hugo rivera
2009-03-04 11:15 ` Vincent Schut
2009-03-04 11:33 ` hugo rivera
2009-03-04 13:23 ` Uriel
2009-03-04 14:57 ` ron minnich
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=3e1162e60903032119i1885178ema25c7942e86a03b9@mail.gmail.com \
--to=leimy2k@gmail.com \
--cc=9fans@9fans.net \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).